Suppr超能文献

评估临床研究或治疗的决策能力:工具综述

Assessing decisional capacity for clinical research or treatment: a review of instruments.

作者信息

Dunn Laura B, Nowrangi Milap A, Palmer Barton W, Jeste Dilip V, Saks Elyn R

机构信息

Department of Psychiatry, 0603-V, University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, CA 92093-0603, USA.

出版信息

Am J Psychiatry. 2006 Aug;163(8):1323-34. doi: 10.1176/ajp.2006.163.8.1323.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The need to evaluate decisional capacity among patients in treatment settings as well as subjects in clinical research settings has increasingly gained attention. Decisional capacity is generally conceptualized to include not only an understanding of disclosed information but also an appreciation of its significance, the ability to use the information in reasoning, and the ability to express a clear choice. The authors critically reviewed existing measures of decisional capacity for research and treatment.

METHOD

Electronic medical and legal databases were searched for articles published from 1980 to 2004 describing structured assessments of adults' capacity to consent to clinical treatment or research protocols. The authors identified 23 decisional capacity assessment instruments and evaluated each in terms of format, content, administration features, and psychometric properties.

RESULTS

Six instruments focused solely on understanding of disclosed information, and 11 tested for understanding, appreciation, reasoning, and expression of a choice. The instruments varied substantially in format, degree of standardization of disclosures, flexibility of item content, and scoring procedures. Reliability and validity also varied widely. All instruments have limitations, ranging from lack of supporting psychometric data to lack of generalizability across contexts.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the instruments reviewed, the MacArthur Competence Assessment Tools for Clinical Research and for Treatment have the most empirical support, although other instruments may be equally or better suited to certain situations. Contextual factors are important but understudied. Capacity assessment tools should undergo further empirically based development and refinement as well as testing with a variety of populations.

摘要

目的

评估治疗环境中的患者以及临床研究环境中的受试者决策能力的必要性日益受到关注。决策能力通常被概念化为不仅包括对所披露信息的理解,还包括对其重要性的认识、在推理中运用该信息的能力以及表达明确选择的能力。作者对现有的研究和治疗决策能力测量方法进行了批判性综述。

方法

检索电子医学和法律数据库,查找1980年至2004年发表的描述对成年人同意临床治疗或研究方案能力进行结构化评估的文章。作者识别出23种决策能力评估工具,并从形式、内容、施测特征和心理测量特性等方面对每种工具进行了评估。

结果

6种工具仅关注对所披露信息的理解,11种工具测试了对信息的理解、认识、推理和选择的表达。这些工具在形式、披露标准化程度、项目内容灵活性和评分程序方面差异很大。信度和效度也有很大差异。所有工具都有局限性,从缺乏支持性的心理测量数据到缺乏跨情境的通用性。

结论

在所审查的工具中,麦克阿瑟临床研究和治疗能力评估工具得到的实证支持最多,尽管其他工具可能同样或更适合某些情况。情境因素很重要,但研究较少。能力评估工具应通过进一步基于实证的开发和完善以及在各种人群中进行测试。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验